Talk:Villa Incognito

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Literature Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] How Does It Look Now?

Judging by the feedback below (and other places) I have revised the article. Suitmonster 05:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV issues

Personally, I think this article is generally good, but the tone seems to be one of gushing over the work, not a sober analysis. I'm sure it's a great book (a friend of mine loves Tom Robbins work), but statements such as "Robbins flexes his unique style and the plot twists bear his hallmark oddities" and "Villa Incognito is like Robbins' other works in that it has at least four plot threads that he wisely sews into one festive sexual garment of a tale, subtley draped over the reader" read more like advertisements than statements of fact. I'm all for creative writing, but I don't think it fits in Wikipedia. Just to make sure I'm clear, my quibble is not with the content of the article, but rather the style in which it's written -- especially since none of the statements in the interpretation section are sourced.

I'd personally go in and clean it up, but I haven't read the book and I'm not conversant with Robbins criticism. I'd probably end up squishing some important details in the process. --FreelanceWizard 22:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

It still looks very POV this year ("remarkably", et cetera), and a lot of the interpretation reads as original research as well. I'll try to find time to prune it, but though I have read the book I haven't read any criticism on it, so I'm not sure I'll have any good cites at my fingertips. LaPrecieuse (talk) 09:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nonsense Line

From the entry:

"This quote above all others, illustrates why the author chose Tanuki for the catalyst of Villa Incognito (if in fact the choice was not made the other way around, with the story being catalyzed by Tanuki)."

This line makes no sense, basically saying "chose A for the catalyst of B" or the other way around with "B being catalized by A". I'm going to just delete this line since it's just another instance of the gushing as noted previously.